This invention relates generally to shoes. More particularly, the present invention relates to a shoe having a novel sole configuration.
It is well known that, by the use of proper shoes, the likelihood of incurring injuries to the lower torso is minimized. In addition, where there is a pre-existing physical disability in the lower torso, pain associated therewith can be minimized by wearing proper shoes and, in particular, shoes that provide a cushioning action when the wearer is either standing or walking. There have been many attempts made to devise a shoe which will resiliently support the wearer. However, much of the prior art has been unsatisfactory either because the resilient support was not properly located or because the shoes were inordinately expensive and were therefore impractical.
One example of the prior art is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,020,240 granted on Nov. 5, 1935, to H. Cochran wherein there is disclosed a shoe having a substantially flat bottom sole and an inner sole that is spaced therefrom by means of an air chamber that extends throughout the length of the shoe from heel to the toe. In the Cochran patent, the bottom sole of the shoe is flat from the heel to the toe so that the weight of the wearer is improperly and unnaturally distributed. Construction as exemplified by the Cochran patent is likely to make walking difficult and may cause muscle fatigue and possibly damage due to the unnatural distribution of the wearer's weight. The air chamber also extends from the front or toe of the shoe to the heel and, therefore, does not localize the cushioning effect to the most sensitive portion that is directly beneath the wearer's arch.
Another example of the prior art is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,682,712 which was granted on Jul. 6, 1954 to P. Owsen et al. A shoe having an inflated sole and heel is disclosed in the Owsen patent. That is, an air chamber extends from the heel to the toe. In addition, the bottom sole disclosed in the Owsen et al patent is completely flat for the entire lenght of the shoe thereby causing an unnatural attitude to be assumed by the wearer. Because the air chamber in the Owsen et al patent is not limited to the area directly beneath the wearer's arch, maximum cushioning benefit cannot be derived.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,120,712 granted on Feb. 11, 1964, to L. Menken discloses still another form of prior art in the general field to which the present invention is directed. The Menken patent exemplifies an air chamber provided between inner and outer soles with the air chamber extending from a location closely adjacent the toe of the shoe and extending rearwardly to the raised heel as distinguished from the substantially flat sole of the present invention.
Still another U.S. Pat. No. 580,501 granted on Apr. 13, 1897, to E. Mobberly discloses a shoe construction wherein an air chamber that is provided between inner and outer soles extends from the toe portion rearwardly to the heel. The Mobberly construction, like that of the previously discussed patents, suffers from the effects of a raised heel that is intended to be compensated for by an air chamber extending over the entire length of the shoe.
Much the same is taught in U.S. Pat. No. 508,034 granted on Nov. 7, 1893, to F. Moore where there is disclosed a shoe having a raised heel and forward air chamber that extends approximately from the arch portion of the shoe to the toe. In addition, a second air chamber is provided rearwardly of the arch and extends over the heel portion of the shoe. It will be appreciated that the air chambers in the Moore patent are positioned fore and aft of the arch portion of the wearer while the raised heel leaves the wearer's arch portion essentially free of walking contact with the ground.
Other variations of those constructions exemplified by the aforementioned patents are disclosed in the following U.S. Pat. to:
Butterfield No. 259,092; Bascom No. 586,155; Harrison, Jr. No. 1,498,838; Manelas No. 1,639,381; Richmond et al No. 3,871,117.